Thursday, September 01, 2016

Feminists hate Fertility Day

The birth rate in Italy is abysmal (1.4 children per woman). The Italian Government has opted to encourage Italians to have children and has even declared a national Fertility Day. That's a healthy sign that the Italian Government wishes to see the Italian people continue into the future. But the campaign has hit a hurdle: Italian feminists and leftists are in shock and outrage at the campaign and they seem to have succeeded in derailing it.

I'll use Giulia Blasi, a radio host and writer, as an example. She complains that:

Beatrice Lorenzin, Italy’s Minister of Health, has approved and promoted a campaign that treats all women as little more than walking incubators, people who should hurry up and have children for the sake of the country.

...The initiative, slated for September 22nd, was promoted through a series of “postcards” that are among the most offensive things I’ve ever seen.

So what is so offensive to her? It's this:

The poster reads "Beauty has no age. Fertility does." Clearly, Giulia Blasi has been raised to view motherhood as something of an existential threat if she finds this one of the most offensive things she has ever seen.

Giulia also finds the following defence of motherhood from the Italian Government so bad that there is "no comment needed":

Motherhood, on the other hand, helps develop creative intelligence and is an extraordinary opportunity for growth. The ingenious organization necessary to make a mum’s day work, the flexibility required by unexpected events, the responsibility and choices involved in childcare, the energy employed daily by a mother are skills and potential yet to be explored in order to facilitate their use upon returning to work.

It's a pity that motherhood has to be defended in terms of developing work skills, rather than as a fulfilment of a woman's feminine nature, but at least the Government is recognising the value of motherhood.

So how does Giulia Blasi believe her government should approach the fertility issue? She thinks the government approach to fertility should be to:

1. Make abortion easier. She is concerned that a woman has to wait seven days for an abortion and that doctors are allowed to be conscientious objectors and not perform abortion procedures.

2. Provide IVF for homosexuals.

3. Support women in jobs, for example, by providing cheaper childcare (which really sends the message to women that what has value are careers, with children being a potential hindrance to the "true aim" of a woman's life).

4. Give easier access to Italian citizenship for immigrant families.

Is it not revealing that what first occurs to her, in considering the issue of babies, is to make abortion even easier than it already is in Italy? She has a visceral reaction against fertility, babies and motherhood - her main concern is how to stop these things. She has joined the great liberal death wish.

I do congratulate the Italian Government for its fertility campaign, and it's likely that it will have a positive effect - if it can overcome the leftist/feminist hurdle. But there are some big picture concerns for any government tackling this issue:

1. In a liberal society what matters is the freedom to be an autonomous individual. This is not a good foundation for encouraging a commitment to parenthood. I don't think anyone who wants to maximise their individual autonomy would logically choose to be a parent. We become parents to fulfil our masculine and feminine natures to be fathers and mothers; to create a loving family circle, a home; and to perpetuate our personal, familial and national lineage (i.e. to reproduce). We don't have children in order to be autonomous.

2. Young people are more likely to marry and be in a position to have children when men have access to work; when there is a moral culture that limits casual relationships; when the divorce rate is low; and when trust and goodwill between the sexes is high. In feminist/liberal societies, these supports for fertility are not always present.

3. The arrangement by which both men and women are expected to work full-time, with both then sharing the domestic work in the evenings and on weekends, is more onerous than family life needs to be. It is one factor encouraging people to either limit the number of children they have, or to avoid having children altogether. It's easier in some ways for people on welfare to have children, as they have more time to give to children.

Governments really do need to change course in a significant way if the fertility issue is to be overcome.

5 comments:

Feminists distort the natural order of things and promote a false understanding of sexuality. A natural end and good of sex is reproduction. This happens ideally in the family where children are brought up by loving parents whose distinct roles compliment each other. Sex in this relationship naturally results in children and also serves to keep the relationship between the man and woman strong, which benefits them personally, society (with fewer divorces and a healthy birthrate)their offspring and future generations.

The feminists reduce sex to pleasure or power and despise the responsibilities of motherhood in favour of careers. What unfortunately happens, and I have seen this in my workplace numerous times, is that women reach their mid to late thirties and recognisise the lies of feminism they have believed. These poor women then try desperately to conceive and raise children at great expense, with the intervention of IVF which has its toll on the family, the relationship between the sexes, the offspring resulting and society at large. Feminist blindly ignore nature and the realities of sex, then play God when the ideologies of their creed rob them of their true desires for motherhood and authentic relationships.

Chris, thanks - and good comment. It is worse when women have bought into the Sex and the City lifestyle in their 20s. They will become accustomed to a party girl lifestyle, with numerous lovers, so that when they do hit the wall and look for a husband they are mostly unfit for marriage - they have lost some of the ability to pair bond and to accept the ordinary routines of family life.

It's offensive because it's true. Feminists hate reality. They hate reality and they hate everything that reminds them of their own femaleness.

And most of all they hate women who like being women. Women who might actually want to have children. Feminists want women to be men because they despise women. That sets off some fairly spectacular cognitive dissonance which explains why they're so angry.

In a sense, that's true -- feminine, classy women who take care of themselves (e.g., drink and eat moderately, exercise, don't take non-prescription drugs, etc.) can look beautiful into their fifties. Beyond that, they can be 'beautiful' because of their character traits; I loved my great-grandmother (who lived into her nineties) simply because she was a happy, loving, caring person who was a joy to be around.The majority of the American women living now are only physically beautiful -- and their physical beauty will only last into their thirties at most. The majority are hateful, selfish, self-centered harpies who have only bad character traits; they also overeat, drink to excess, and take drugs like they're popcorn. No man wants to be around them when their physical beauty has withered, and rightfully so -- because these women have nothing to offer but their bitterness, spite, envy, and hatred. It's ironic, but they live in a Hell of their own making, through their own bad choices (which resulted from accepting bad advice and bad counsel from feminists).

A woman's body provides a clue to her "telos" - to the path by which she fulfils her created nature. If a young woman were to stand naked in front of a mirror, then the truth she is confronted with is that one part of her telos is motherhood, as this is unmistakably part of her created being, but hopefully she will also see a physical beauty and a softness, that will also encourage her to cultivate the inner qualities to match this - she should feel challenged to bring her inner life up to the standard of how she is embodied. There is a hint in her body of a nobility that she can rise to if she succeeds in this.

But I have to agree with you that women, in general, are not cultivating an inner beauty to match their physical beauty. And, yes, this does make it difficult for men to be in a relationship with them. A man wants to love the woman he is with, and this means he has to find a reason to admire her and to believe that she is worthy of his love, and physical beauty alone isn't enough to inspire this. He has to feel that there is feminine virtue there as well - a loveliness in her being, that is different from the harder masculine virtues that he himself has cultivated.

I do wonder what will happen to the millions of women you have described when they no longer even have sex appeal to draw male interest. There will be a lot of people living alone in their later years.